Okonkwo David O, Shutter Lori A, Moore Carol, Temkin Nancy R, Puccio Ava M, Madden Christopher J, Andaluz Norberto, Chesnut Randall M, Bullock M Ross, Grant Gerald A, McGregor John, Weaver Michael, Jallo Jack, LeRoux Peter D, Moberg Dick, Barber Jason, Lazaridis Christos, Diaz-Arrastia Ramon R
1University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA. 2Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD. 3University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 4UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX. 5University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH. 6University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL. 7Stanford University, Stanford, CA. 8Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH. 9Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. 10Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA. 11Lankenau Medical Center, Wynnewood, PA. 12Moberg Research, Ambler, PA. 13Baylor St. Luke's Medical Center, Houston, TX. 14Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
Crit Care Med. 2017 Nov;45(11):1907-1914. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002619.
A relationship between reduced brain tissue oxygenation and poor outcome following severe traumatic brain injury has been reported in observational studies. We designed a Phase II trial to assess whether a neurocritical care management protocol could improve brain tissue oxygenation levels in patients with severe traumatic brain injury and the feasibility of a Phase III efficacy study.
Randomized prospective clinical trial.
Ten ICUs in the United States.
One hundred nineteen severe traumatic brain injury patients.
Patients were randomized to treatment protocol based on intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation monitoring versus intracranial pressure monitoring alone. Brain tissue oxygenation data were recorded in the intracranial pressure -only group in blinded fashion. Tiered interventions in each arm were specified and impact on intracranial pressure and brain tissue oxygenation measured. Monitors were removed if values were normal for 48 hours consecutively, or after 5 days. Outcome was measured at 6 months using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended.
A management protocol based on brain tissue oxygenation and intracranial pressure monitoring reduced the proportion of time with brain tissue hypoxia after severe traumatic brain injury (0.45 in intracranial pressure-only group and 0.16 in intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation group; p < 0.0001). Intracranial pressure control was similar in both groups. Safety and feasibility of the tiered treatment protocol were confirmed. There were no procedure-related complications. Treatment of secondary injury after severe traumatic brain injury based on brain tissue oxygenation and intracranial pressure values was consistent with reduced mortality and increased proportions of patients with good recovery compared with intracranial pressure-only management; however, the study was not powered for clinical efficacy.
Management of severe traumatic brain injury informed by multimodal intracranial pressure and brain tissue oxygenation monitoring reduced brain tissue hypoxia with a trend toward lower mortality and more favorable outcomes than intracranial pressure-only treatment. A Phase III randomized trial to assess impact on neurologic outcome of intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation-directed treatment of severe traumatic brain injury is warranted.
观察性研究报告了严重创伤性脑损伤后脑组织氧合降低与不良预后之间的关系。我们设计了一项II期试验,以评估神经重症监护管理方案是否能改善严重创伤性脑损伤患者的脑组织氧合水平,以及III期疗效研究的可行性。
随机前瞻性临床试验。
美国的10个重症监护病房。
119例严重创伤性脑损伤患者。
根据颅内压加脑组织氧合监测与单纯颅内压监测,将患者随机分组接受治疗方案。单纯颅内压组以盲法记录脑组织氧合数据。明确了每组的分层干预措施,并测量其对颅内压和脑组织氧合的影响。如果连续48小时数值正常或5天后,移除监测设备。使用扩展格拉斯哥预后量表在6个月时测量预后。
基于脑组织氧合和颅内压监测的管理方案降低了严重创伤性脑损伤后脑组织缺氧的时间比例(单纯颅内压组为0.45,颅内压加脑组织氧合组为0.16;p<0.0001)。两组的颅内压控制情况相似。证实了分层治疗方案的安全性和可行性。没有与操作相关的并发症。与单纯颅内压管理相比,基于脑组织氧合和颅内压值的严重创伤性脑损伤继发性损伤治疗与降低死亡率及增加恢复良好患者比例一致;然而,该研究的样本量不足以评估临床疗效。
多模式颅内压和脑组织氧合监测指导下的严重创伤性脑损伤管理减少了脑组织缺氧,与单纯颅内压治疗相比,有降低死亡率和改善预后的趋势。有必要进行一项III期随机试验,以评估颅内压加脑组织氧合指导治疗严重创伤性脑损伤对神经功能预后的影响。